Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Global Warming

Options
189111314

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭hoser expat


    A deeply unsettling and factual video about global warming and shocking and real effects already visible on the Irish landscape:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czg6JOvgJOU&feature=channel_page


    Ahhh, same tired message but at least it's well done. Most of the message had proper spelling and grammar, so we know that derry didn't do it!:P


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,380 ✭✭✭derry


    Ahhh, same tired message but at least it's well done. Most of the message had proper spelling and grammar, so we know that derry didn't do it!:P

    To the others thanks for the amusing film no coconuts in cork

    I will let this Irish site do the speaking and save me typing and they can spell to keep the nazi spellers happy

    I only found them a few days ago so they did not influence my previous posts but come to similar results and themes from a differnt direction

    http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=69

    reproduced for legitimate education reqiuirements and fair use

    Elite Depopulation Agenda Gains Ground*

    Infowars.net
    10.12.2007
    Steve Watson

    Another prominent scientist has thrown his weight behind the long term agenda to implement measures to stem the population of the planet, a view that is gaining ground with increased pressure on governments to act over climate change as the justification.

    The Medical Journal of Australia has published a report by a professor who suggests that couples with more than two children should be charged a lifelong tax to offset their extra offspring’s carbon dioxide emissions.

    The report in an Australian medical journal called for parents to be charged $5000 a head for every child after their second, and an annual tax of up to $800, reports the AAP.

    And couples who were sterilised would be eligible for carbon credits under the controversial proposal.

    The report, written by Perth specialist Professor Barry Walters, also suggests that the government should introduce a “baby levy” in the form of a carbon tax in line with the “polluter pays” principle.

    he proposals smack of Communist China’s one child policy and present a nightmare scenario of authoritarian governmental control. Under such legislation the government would essentially have the power to force people to stop re-producing.

    You may think such views are extreme and representative of a small minority, and you’d be right. The problem however is that this minority are the ones in power.

    Similar views have been espoused by UN agencies such as the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), WHO and UNICEF and international NGO’s such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation, as well as The US Government for decades.

    We have previously documented the elite’s hideous interest in depopulation techniques, an interest that mirrors the nightmare eugenics visions of Nazi scientists in the 1940s.

    Calls to begin sterilizing the human population have previously been put forward by former secretary of State and high ranking Bilderberger Henry Kissinger in a declassified document of the National Security Council (1974) entitled “The Implications of World-wide Population Growth on the Security and External Interests of the United States”.

    This document lists, as a priority, birth-rate control in 13 key countries in the Third World, especially in South America. Extraordinary resources were allotted to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to implement the policy of birth-rate control.

    The memorandum basically stresses the need to offer increased aid for third world countries that agree to implement programs of sterilization and depopulation.

    It also contains sections entitled:

    Creating Conditions Conducive to Fertility Decline, which calls for, amongst other things, “reducing infant and child mortality”

    Concentration on Education and Indoctrination of The Rising Generation of Children Regarding the Desirability of Smaller Family Size

    Utilization of Mass Media and Satellite Communications Systems for Family Planning

    The memorandum also includes a section that lauds abortion and states that ” — It would be unwise to restrict abortion research for the following reasons: 1) The persistent and ubiquitous nature of abortion. 2) Widespread lack of safe abortion techniques…”

    The document contains many more hideous passages, read it for yourself by clicking here.

    Kissinger also prepared a depopulation manifesto for President Jimmy Carter called ‘Global 2000′ which detailed using food as a weapon to depopulate the third world.

    The United Nations Population Fund directly supports policies such as that of the “one child policy” in Communist China which encapsulates coercive and enforced abortion.

    In 2002 Secretary of State Colin Powell stated in a letter to Congress:

    “Regrettably, the People’s Republic of China has in place a regime of severe penalties on women who have unapproved births. This regime plainly operates to coerce pregnant women to have abortions in order to avoid the penalties and therefore amounts to a ‘program of coercive abortion.’ Regardless of the modest size of UNFPA’s budget in China or any benefits its programs provide, UNFPA’s support of, and involvement in, China’s population-planning activities allows the Chinese government to implement more effectively its program of coercive abortion.”

    Yet The UNPFA seem to think this is a great thing:

    “China has had the most successful family planning policy in the history of mankind in terms of quantity and with that, China has done mankind a favour,” United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) representative Sven Burmester said last week. —10/11/99 Agence France-Presse

    Under the Reagan Administration legislation sponsored by then-Rep. Jack Kemp (NY) and then-Sen. Bob Kasten (WI) ensured funding to the UNPFA was cut off for these very reasons. Yet is was no surprise when In 1993, the Clinton Administration dramatically revised the official interpretation of the “Kemp-Kasten amendment” in order to facilitate U.S. funding of UNFPA, thus making available $14.5 million.

    In May 2003, the House Committee on International Relations narrowly adopted an an amendment by Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-NY) revoking the ban on such participation with the UNPFA. The amendment earmarked $100 million for UNFPA over the next two years.

    Such calls to depopulate are echoed within the western scientific community by prominent figures such as Dr. Eric R. Pianka, who travels around the US speaking of the need to exterminate 90% of the population in order to save the planet. He suggests using the airborne ebola virus to do the job, choosing it over AIDS because of its faster kill period. Ebola victims suffer the most tortuous deaths imaginable as the virus kills by liquefying the internal organs. The body literally dissolves as the victim writhes in pain bleeding from every orifice.

    Pianka is always keen to stress that his views are not race specific and that he wants to see 90% of all races exterminated. He is quoted as saying “We need to sterilize everybody on the earth and make the antidote freely available to anyone willing to work for it”.

    Pianka was presented with a distinguished scientist award by the Texas Academy of Science in 2006. Pianka is no crackpot. He has given lectures to prestigious universities worldwide. His chilling comments, and their often enthusiastic reception, again underscore the elite’s agenda to enact horrifying measures of population control.

    Dr Pianka’s comments are merely echoes of the elite lust for a Malthusian social Darwinist control mechanism. They wish to use the excuse of having to “save the earth” in order to take away freedom and implement a massive authoritarian control grid.

    These views have also been famously perpetuated by control freaks such as Ted Turner, Jacques-Yves Cousteau and Prince Philip.

    “The simplest answer is that the world’s population should be about two billion, and we’ve got about six billion now,” Turner told E Magazine, an environmentalist publication. Turner went even further in an interview with Audubon magazine, stating that “A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

    In a 1991 interview with the UNESCO Courier, Jacques-Yves Cousteau, the famous Emmy award winning film producer who went on to be a kingpin of the environmental movement said, “It’s terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day.”

    That works out to 127,750,000 people per year, and 1.27 billion people over 10 years.

    In the foreword to his 1986 book If I Were an Animal, Prince Philip wrote, “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”

    The elite are very concerned about their noble effort to cull the population for the “greater good”. Throughout history elites have invented justification for barbaric practices as a cover for their true agenda of absolute power and control over populations. Up until the 19th century, the transatlantic slave trade was justified by saying that the practice was biblical and therefore morally redeemable in nature, despite the fact that no such bible passage exists.

    Today the control mechanism is the continued perpetuation of the myth that humanity is killing the planet. Elite organisations such as the Bilderberg Group, CFR, Trilateral Commission, and their think tanks like the Club of Rome are engaged in selling this myth to the masses.

    In a report titled The First Global Revolution (1991) published by the Club of Rome, a globalist think tank whose members have included Kissinger, David Rockefeller and Al Gore, we find the following statement:

    “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. All these dangers are caused by human intervention… The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

    In the past, the Club of Rome has resorted to deceptive tactics in order to support their plans. In 1972, the Club of Rome, along with an MIT team released a report called Limits to growth. The report stated that we were to reach an environmental holocaust by the year 2000 due to overpopulation and other environmental problems. Support for their conclusions was gathered by results from a computer model. Aurelio Peccei, one of the founders of the Club of Rome, later confessed that the computer program had been written to give the desired results.

    Why is this so concerning? Because groups such as the Club of Rome are contracted out by our own governments and the UN to prepare ‘Policy Guidance Documents’ which they use in formulating their policies and programs. How come the Club of Rome gets the gig? Simply because many high ranking UN and government officials are also CoR members, or have direct corporate ties to members. The same goes for the CFR and the Trilateral Commission.

    A recently unearthed documentary that sought to expose this agenda at its inception is George Hunt’s excellent research piece on the environmental movement.

    Alex Jones’ latest documentary, Endgame breaks new ground by succinctly tying the hijacking of the environmental movement with the depopulation agenda. The film outlines how the scientific rationale for tyranny gives the elite an excuse for treating their fellow man like lab rats and how this mindset gave rise to the emergence of eugenics in the 19th century. Endgame catalogues how the Malthusian drive to eliminate the poor developed into social Darwinism which then transgressed into the fields of racial hygiene programs and genetic screening as American citizens were forcibly sterilized by the state throughout the 19th century.

    Endgame also charts how the Rockefeller family exported eugenics to Germany by bankrolling the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute which later would form a central pillar in the Third Reich’s ideology of the Nazi super race. After the fall of the Nazis, top eugenicists were protected by the allies as the victorious parties fought over who would enjoy their “expertise” in the post-war world.

    The comments of elitists alive today who openly advocate “culling” the human population by means of mass genocide, plagues and viruses are also considered alongside Aldous Huxley’s warning that ruling oligarchies would use advanced techniques of medicine and pharmacology to ensure the human population “enjoy their servitude”.

    Endgame rips wide open how the myth of man-made global warming is being hyped by the establishment in order to create new feudalist control methods and convince people that their every action should be regulated by the state in the interests of supposedly saving the planet, while the real environmental crises go ignored.

    The doomsday warning of the population bomb consistently referred to as justification for depopulation is also complete pseudo-science. Populations in developed countries are declining and only in third world countries is it expanding dramatically. Industrialization itself levels out population trends and even despite this world population models routinely show that the earth’s population will level out at 9 billion in 2050 and slowly decline after that. “The population of the most developed countries will remain virtually unchanged at 1.2 billion until 2050,” states a United Nations report. The UN population policies seem to be in direct contradiction to THEIR OWN FINDINGS.

    Conservation International’s own study revealed that 46% of the earth’s surface was an untouched wilderness, that is land areas not including sea. It is commonly accepted that the entire world population could all fit into the state of Texas and each have an acre of their own land.

    Once a country industrializes there is an average of a 1.6 child rate per household, so the western world population is actually in decline. That trend has also been witnessed in areas of Asia like Japan and South Korea. The UN has stated that the population will peak at 9 billion and then begin declining.

    Even if you buy into the propaganda that climate change is caused by man in the face of the facts, and then buy into the propaganda that there are too many people on the planet in the face of the facts, can you justify advocating state micro management of your life down to how many children you are allowed to have? Furthermore, can you justify programs of sterilization?

    We are being bombarded daily with idiotic notions that the human race and life itself is a virus that has spread all over the planet and that we must consider stemming our own progression to counter it.

    Meanwhile, as we ludicrously debate culling ourselves, real environmental problems are doing the job for us. Genetically modified garbage is poisoning our very food supply, chemical pollutants are flowing into our water supplies, the disappearance of huge swathes of the bee populations across the world is threatening crop production, deforestation, toxic waste dumping, the list goes on. All these real important issues are being buried in a sea a frothing bull****.

    Every time the issue of climate change is raised the we are told that the solution is more taxes and more extreme control over our lives. These things will not reverse the effects of climate change, which has been proven to be a thoroughly natural cycle of our planet since the dawn of time. Instead they will do everything to grease the skids for draconian taxation and control measures that will aid the construction of the prison planet that the elite have planned all along.


    Derry


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    A deeply unsettling and factual video about global warming and shocking and real effects already visible on the Irish landscape:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czg6JOvgJOU&feature=channel_page
    So because it snowed in Sligo a few weeks ago, global warming could not possibly be a real problem (I'm going to ignore the series of ridiculous statements in the video, for now)?

    It's been unusually warm in the south-west this week; does that mean that we are now witnessing a runaway greenhouse effect?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,380 ✭✭✭derry


    djpbarry wrote: »
    So because it snowed in Sligo a few weeks ago, global warming could not possibly be a real problem (I'm going to ignore the series of ridiculous statements in the video, for now)?

    It's been unusually warm in the south-west this week; does that mean that we are now witnessing a runaway greenhouse effect?


    SSSSHHH dont say it so loud.You risk the whole of Dublin decending on the sunny south east to get thier sun tans up and running and robbing your coco nuts :pac:

    Derry


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 621 ✭✭✭Nostradamus


    djpbarry wrote: »
    So because it snowed in Sligo a few weeks ago, global warming could not possibly be a real problem (I'm going to ignore the series of ridiculous statements in the video, for now)?

    It's been unusually warm in the south-west this week; does that mean that we are now witnessing a runaway greenhouse effect?

    There is a big ball of fire in the sky called "The Sun".

    I know this blows some people's minds but the Sun does play a part in earth temps. You see it is made of this thing called "heat". Lots of "heat".

    No honest! I am not kidding!!!

    Gosh, the world must of been really freezing before the Irish Civil Service found a new taxation means to help fund their jobs for life and monster pensions. So how many civil servants second homes in Mayo will be funded with these Carbon Taxes?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    djpbarry wrote: »
    It's been unusually warm in the south-west this week; does that mean that we are now witnessing a runaway greenhouse effect?
    There is a big ball of fire in the sky called "The Sun".

    I know this blows some people's minds but the Sun does play a part in earth temps. You see it is made of this thing called "heat". Lots of "heat".

    No honest! I am not kidding!!!

    Gosh, the world must of been really freezing before the Irish Civil Service found a new taxation means to help fund their jobs for life and monster pensions. So how many civil servants second homes in Mayo will be funded with these Carbon Taxes?
    So that's a 'No' then?

    Oh and I'm going to assume the highlighted text is a joke.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving




    Climate change myths, debunked.

    re: climate cooling claims from 1970s


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,380 ✭✭✭derry


    " YOUTUBE EU_AtHkB4Ms /YOUTUBE "

    Climate change myths, debunked.

    re: climate cooling claims from 1970s

    I think you meant " http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU_AtHkB4Ms "

    Derry


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 212 ✭✭Jackeenboy


    Roll on global warming and white christmas's.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 335 ✭✭acontadino


    what the **** are schools doing? i was talking to my sister today and she told me that global warming isnt true..ffs..its time we indocrtinate people so we can keep this earth alive


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    derry wrote: »
    I think you meant " http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU_AtHkB4Ms "

    Derry

    The video is nicely embedded, from my perspective.

    :confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry




    Climate change myths, debunked.

    re: climate cooling claims from 1970s
    Very nice little presentation that emphasises the importance of checking the sources of scientific information.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    acontadino wrote: »
    what the **** are schools doing? i was talking to my sister today and she told me that global warming isnt true..ffs..its time we indocrtinate people so we can keep this earth alive

    acontadino, the earth will be fine and will survive no matter what we as a population do, we cannot destroy the earth, we can make it uninhabitable, but we cannot destroy it...

    anyway just cause you believe it is true, doesn't mean that it should be so and taught that way in school....
    a lot of people don't believe this global warming propaganda,


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    robtri wrote: »
    anyway just cause you believe it is true, doesn't mean that it should be so and taught that way in school...
    Do you think the scientific basis for the argument should be taught in school?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Do you think the scientific basis for the argument should be taught in school?

    I think the scientific argument for both sides, should be given in school,


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    robtri wrote: »
    I think the scientific argument for both sides, should be given in school,

    Like evolution and creationism?

    Do you think that children should be handed the responsibility of deciding what is scientifically valid, and what is not?


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    robtri wrote: »
    I think the scientific argument for both sides, should be given in school,
    Fair enough. But do you accept that the argument for AGW is based on far more scientific evidence than the argument against? As such, it is likely to require far more teaching hours to convey the basis for one side of the argument than the other.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    Like evolution and creationism?

    Do you think that children should be handed the responsibility of deciding what is scientifically valid, and what is not?

    considering that as a whole adults cannot decide if global warming and the cause is true or not, I cannot see why not.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Fair enough. But do you accept that the argument for AGW is based on far more scientific evidence than the argument against? As such, it is likely to require far more teaching hours to convey the basis for one side of the argument than the other.

    I don't accept that that statement, I belive that both sides have their own scientific merits and each aspect need to be considered.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    robtri wrote: »
    considering that as a whole adults cannot decide if global warming and the cause is true or not, I cannot see why not.

    Hmm. So we should just have a vote on every scientific issue there is, irrespective of educational background? Mob rule? Don't be so silly.

    Truth is not a democracy.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    Hmm. So we should just have a vote on every scientific issue there is, irrespective of educational background? Mob rule? Don't be so silly.

    Truth is not a democracy.

    where in my post did I say I wanted a vote or mob rule, please don't put your own BS assumptions onto my posts.

    there is compelling evidence, from members of the scientific commuity for both sides of the argument,
    I have read compelling scientific arguments stating that AGW is true and also arguments stating that other factors are mainly responsible for GW.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    robtri wrote: »
    where in my post did I say I wanted a vote or mob rule, please don't put your own BS assumptions onto my posts.

    there is compelling evidence, from members of the scientific commuity for both sides of the argument,
    I have read compelling scientific arguments stating that AGW is true and also arguments stating that other factors are mainly responsible for GW.

    So children should be allowed to decide what is scientifically valid, and what is not?

    What is your scientific training?


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    robtri wrote: »
    I don't accept that that statement, I belive that both sides have their own scientific merits and each aspect need to be considered.
    Well let me ask you this...

    Suppose you were asked to compile a school science lesson on the subject of climate change; what would your lesson entail? Let's assume that the lesson is to be targeted at leaving cert students.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    So children should be allowed to decide what is scientifically valid, and what is not?

    What is your scientific training?

    The scientific community cannot agree on AGW, so if we are to teach children about AGW it stands to reason that they are taught all the facts for and against AGW.....

    My scientific qualifications/training have nothing to do with this... I am not validating either side of the argument...


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Well let me ask you this...

    Suppose you were asked to compile a school science lesson on the subject of climate change; what would your lesson entail? Let's assume that the lesson is to be targeted at leaving cert students.

    If I had to this, I would provide information for and aginst AGW, and present it impartially to the students and have them get involved in the debate and let them evaluate the evidence to the best of their ability.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    robtri wrote: »
    The scientific community cannot agree on AGW, so if we are to teach children about AGW it stands to reason that they are taught all the facts for and against AGW...

    In what field does the scientific community agree on anything? You do realise the whole function of science is people making qualified disagreements with one another. All that matters is the evidence. What does the evidence say? This is what we should be teaching children.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    In what field does the scientific community agree on anything? You do realise the whole function of science is people making qualified disagreements with one another. All that matters is the evidence. What does the evidence say? This is what we should be teaching children.

    to me the evidence says AGW is not wholey true,looking at the evidence I would say that there is many different factors influencing GW that people, so taking that, so according to your logic this is what we should be teaching no questions asked, thats resolves that one..


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    robtri wrote: »
    The scientific community cannot agree on AGW...
    That's a little disingenuous, don't you think? The scientific community are agreed on AGW, so far as it is possible for a large number of scientists to agree on anything.

    While we're on the subject, I actually dislike the term "scientific community", because it is rather vague and meaningless. What exactly is the "scientific community"? Anyone with a scientific qualification?
    robtri wrote: »
    If I had to this, I would provide information for and aginst AGW...
    Could you be a little more specific? What information would you provide? Could you give a brief overview?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    You do realise the whole function of science is people making qualified disagreements with one another. All that matters is the evidence. What does the evidence say? This is what we should be teaching children.
    robtri wrote: »
    so according to your logic this is what we should be teaching no questions asked

    No. This isn't what I was saying. Are you sure you're responding to me?


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,380 ✭✭✭derry


    Man when I did school they told me a load of Sh!t that the world was overpopulated and we would all be starving before the year 2000

    The geography book got that distorted info from the euginics and exterminate mankind crap that Kissinger and his his UN buddies mostly ex Nazi who run the UN disiminated into the education systems of the world.

    I wouldnt want schools loading modern kids with that hyped up suedo science that the UN preaches so as to justify why they the elite can cull 90% of the worlds population becuase we breath air and make CO2

    The run of the mill school hasnt got any abilty to teach all the facts about AGW for or against the subject so it better to leave it of the course than to do a bad job or worse take a side on the issue .

    Much as I would love to say all schools should only teach that CO2 and AGW is no problem or a false science its better for the schools to be nuetral teach nothing on the subject.Students who wish could research the subject on thier own time much as they research the latest pop song to get to the top of the charts and other things that are far more important to the youth than CO2 and AGW debates .:cool:
    In my time it was pink floyd and dark side oif the moon :D

    We played that music a lot to lift our spirts as we lived with a half hour Nuke bomb threat and before 2000 we were dead meat anyway

    Teacher leave those kids alone ....

    Derry


Advertisement